Ashok Bhan, J. - (1.) State of Haryana filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,09667/-(Rs. 54833.50 as Principal and Rs. 54833.50 as interest) against the defendant-petitioners firm M/s Jogi Ram Krishan Kumar (defunct) through its partner Jogi Ram (defendant No. 2). The firm had got the seed agency from District Agriculture Officer for sale of seeds. Wheat seed was supplied to the petitioners by the department from time to time and the supplies were received by the firm through Shri Jogi Ram its partner. Defendants failed to pay the above mentioned amount despite repeated demands and hence the present suit was filed.
(2.) In the written statement, defendants controverted the allegations of the plaintiff and denied that defendant firm had obtained any seed agency and got supplies from the plaintiff. It was alleged by them that the receipts and entries alleged by the plaintiff are forged and fictitious. Issues were framed on 11.8.1986 and parties led their evidence. On 12.2.1990, the present application for leading additional evidence under Order 18 rule 2(4), 17, 17-A read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) was moved by the plaintiff-respondent submitting that the defendant had appended his signatures and other writings in Urdu language on the agreement and other receipts against which the defendant received wheat and grams. Defendant No. 2 had taken the plea that he did not know any other language except Mundi Hindi and he always appended his signatures in Mundi Hindi only. In the present case, allegedly defendant No. 2 is shown to have signed the documents in Urdu, According to defendant No. 2, he did not know Urdu at all and that his signatures on the documents which are purported to be in Urdu language are forced. In order to controvert this plea of defendant No. 2 plaintiff-respondent sought to produce additional evidence by adducing certain documents where defendant No. 2 has appended his signatures in Urdu language. Plaintiff wanted to produce four witnesses as additional evidence along with the judicial record. In the application, plaintiff-respondent has given the details of the witnesses as well as the documents sought to be produced as additional evidence. These are identification slips of the accused attached to the criminal case, charge-sheet and subsidy vouchers. This application has been opposed by the defendant on the ground that this evidence could have been produced by the State while leading its evidence in affirmative if they had been little more vigilant. Trial Court allowed the application for leading additional evidence vide order dated 27.2.1990 and the said order has been impugned in this revision petition.
(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and find that order of the trial Court is a well reasoned order and the opportunity which has been granted to the plaintiff-respondent to lead additional evidence is in the larger interest of justice. Plaintiff has submitted that the existence of these documents on judicial file was not in the knowledge of the plaintiff and those documents would show that defendant Jogi Ram had been putting his signatures in Urdu Language earlier and that his plea that he did not know Urdu and had been appending his signatures in Mundi Hindi only is a false pleas. This being the position and the documents being very relevant and going to the root of the matter and are coming from proper custody that is judicial record, the same should be allowed to be placed on the plaintiff permitted to lead evidence in order to give substantial justice to the record and the parties. Even if some inconvenience has been caused to defendants, the same has been adequately compensated by the trial court by awarding Rs. 200/- as costs. I thus, find no substance in this revision petition and the same is dismissed with no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.;